After four years of college, I could no longer run from chemistry. After numerous drops from the class, I finally found a chemistry book which is easy to understand. This book has every example problem you could think of. Every chapter gives you a good introduction, then cuts strait to the points every novice chemistry student should know to pass a general college level class. I do suggest a run through of chemistry in high school before stepping up to this book. I would have liked to have seen a book accompany the text which shows the drawn out ways to answer the review questions at the end of every chapter. Other than that this book is very down to earth and easy to follow.

This book is very well written, with helpful diagrams and detailed examples. It is easy to understand and text and with this book it is truly not hard to understand chemistry and do well. I easily got an A in Chemistry I and I believe that everyone who failed the class simply didn't look over the book or their notes after class. It certainly wasn't the fault of the professor or the text- both explained chemistry very well.

This is a very good text book. It has many colorful pictures to keep my interest when I was reading it along my course. Generally, it is well written and easy to understand.

I got this book because of the good review here, but i must say that i was not impressed by this book at all. The details are too sketchy even for a review book. Some of the stastistics are diffrent from standards such as the ECA and NCS studies.
It has great potential as book to use as framework and using another book like kaplock/saddock to confirm facts or expand info.

The excellent!!! book for part one preparation. It is very concise, comprehensive and easy to follow. You can cover key knowledge in short time. It also has question/answer part, which is extremely helpful. I PASSED my part one.

A must for the PRITE and the Part I Psychaitry Board

No doubt about it: Alston Chase can write well enough
to keep my attention, but he cannot argue a point
well enough to convince me. Despite his training
as a philosopher, Chase just cannot seem to distinguish
himself from his object, the Unabomber.

Indeed, there is a gaping hole in Chase's thesis that
Ted Kaczynski's experience at Harvard was partly responsible
for the homicidal genius known as the Unabomber. In particular,
Chase places some responsibility on the murky experiments conducted by Harvard psychology professor Henry A. Murray. Kaczynski was apparently one of Murray's subjects.

But there are at least two large gaps in Chase's argument.
First, Chase provides not a single statement from Kaczynski
that shows any animosity or ill effects from Murray's experiments or from the Harvard experience. This is expected given Chase's frequent citation of some of the Unabomber's journal entries.

And when Chase does include a quote to enlighten us on the Unabomber's motivations, he selects one where Kaczynski says (p. 342): "My ambition is to kill a scientist, big businessman, governement official or the like." Nothing here about Murray; and more significantly,nothing here about hating Harvard.

Indeed, the more more glaring objection to Chase's thesis is that the Unabomber never targeted Harvard as far as we know. We know that Kaczynski targeted Berkeley, where he had worked. He sent a bomb to the University of Michigan, where he received his Ph.D. He even sent a bomb to Yale. But no, not even one to Harvard. It looks as if the Unabomber went out of his way to avoid harming Harvard.

Chase's injection of his own philosophical and anti-Harvard sentiments have already been addressed in the review by Todd Gitlin in The Washington Post (March 2, 2003). Despite Chase's protestations to this review, Gitlin documents the fact that Chase wrongly assumed that his 1953 syllabus for a class had the same readings as the one Kaczynski followed later.

Some fifteen years ago I read an essay by Chase in BYU Today (August 1985). Therein he seemingly provides a shorter version of the book on the Unambomber. One finds in that article lamentations about the moral relativism and alienating nature of modern civilization. It concludes with a plea to allow faith and teleology to have a larger role in our world-view lest we descend into moral chaos.

Of course, Chase ignores the fact that faith and teleology are largely responsible for the moral chaos of modern civilization. In any event, Chase apparently has now found the embodiment of alienation in Ted Kaczynski.

But all is not lost for Chase's book, which manages to provide interesting musings on some intellectual trends of the post-War era. But to the extent that he tries to be more specific about the Harvard connections, Chase fails. The book is more about Chase than about Kaczynski's problems with Harvard. Accordingly, the book should best be titled: "Harvard and Alston Chase."

Alston Chase argues that Ted Kaczynski was not insane, that he was not a hermit, and that his Unabomber Manifesto was a well-written and well-thought out critique of our technological society.
Chase is especially hard on the news media, whom he claims got just about everything wrong. He names names, the NEW YORK TIMES, NEWSWEEK, AND TIME MAGAZINE garnering their share of criticism. Chase claims Kaczynski was no worse than any other math whiz until he got to Harvard, where he volunteered for Henry A. Murray's "Multiform Assessments of Personality Development" experiment with twenty-one other elite students. The subjects were told to write an essay expounding on their philosophy of life which would be debated by an aggressive young lawyer. According to Chase, Kaczynski was humiliated by this experience, having nightmares about psychologists chasing him. Eventually Kaczynski would target psychologists versed in behavior modification.
Chase doesn't spend much time on biography, but he does show Kaczynski growing up in Evergreen Park, Illinois, the first child of intellectual parents, whom he later blames for pushing him too hard. After skipping two grades in school, he arrives at Harvard totally lacking in social skills. Apparently he never grew up. We see him later on writing obscene lyrics on the walls at Foam Cutting Engineers after a woman he had fallen in love with spurns him.
Alston Chase indicts the curriculum at Harvard during the time Kaczynski spent there as co-conspirators, especially something called positivism, the theory that only empirically verifiable statements are meaningful, that moral and spiritual judgments, not being verifiable, are mere "cognitively meaningless expressions of emotion." Kaczynski would use this as a philosophical underpinning for what he did.
Chase's argues that Ted Kaczynski is far from alone in his hatred toward technology. Most all terrorists hate modern technological civilization, many of them living right here in the United States. Just one example the December 1999 "Battle of Seattle" at the World Trade Organization meeting, where ecosaboteurs ran amok.
This sort of happening may be closer to home than you might think. I have to admit that I wasn't aware of the Earth Liberation Front's 2002 attack on the University of Minnesota's future genetic research center that caused $630,000 in damages.
Chase's conclusion sums things up quite effectively. He cautions against intellectual pride, that seduces people (politicians, psychologists, educators) into believing "that they have a right to decide what's best for others." Right on, brother!

Alston Chase wanted to write a book about the 1960s; the arrest of Ted Kaczynski suggested the topic. AC led a parallel life: public school, Harvard, many of the same courses from the same professors, graduate student and assistant professor, received a PhD, and moved to the Montana wilderness. AC found that the most transforming decade was the 1950s; the 1960s were "merely acting out a drama whose script had already been written" (p.12). The "Unabomber Manifesto" contained many of the ideas found in the lectures and readings found at Harvard and other liberal arts colleges (pp.20-21).

Virtually everything that most people believe about TK is false! His ideas date from the 1950s, not the 1960s. His decision to retreat to the wilderness was made at Harvard, not Berkeley. TK is not a revolutionary hero, nor original philosopher, not genuine environmentalist. His manifesto is neither brilliant nor a sign of mental illness, but a set of cliches whose sentiments are shared by millions (p.24). TK was not the first Harvard murderer (p.26), but had the highest body count - he used technology!

Harvard was the site of the Murray psychological experiments on undergraduates which were so unsavory and unethical as to be kept secret to this day (p.31). This book is about the dysfunctional high school environment that is still with us. It tells about the exploitation of colleges during the Cold War by the government. These forces created a culture of despair that infects the educational system and promotes patterns of violence. The purpose of this book is to understand TK as an intellectual and as a criminal.

Pages 85-94 analyze the "Unabomber Manifesto". It contains the conventional wisdom of the entire country. Its publication led to his capture since its thinking identified the author to his family. Pages 123-4 tell of the newspaper reports of his arrest. TK's habits were not dissimilar to others in his area. It tells about TK's friends in the area (pp.125-6). Page 131 shows small groups of journalists discussing how the news should be played, then filing identical stories on the trial. TK faced the death penalty, but he refused the defense of "diminished mental state" (pp.134-40). The evaluation by experts had conclusions that supported their side (p.141). Was the decision by the judge (p.147) part of a cover-up?

Chapter 11 to 13 covers General Education and the "Culture of Despair" that follows "logical positivism". Was its effect to brainwash and break down the values of the "best and the brightest" to create subservient automatons for corporate America? Could this explain the appeal of fundamentalist sects? This is the most important part of this book! Gen Ed undermined values rather than reinforced them (p.205).

Chapter 15 tells of Murray's Experiment, which violated the Nuremburg Code (p.236). Many questionnaires were used to learn the background of the subject before 'The Experiment'. Does it remind you of that interrogation in "The Darkness at Noon"? Chapter 16 tells about Henry Murray, a psychologist who couldn't cure himself. The book ends by noting that schools are even less dedicated to learning than they were, substituting political and behavioral correctness, and using drugs to do this (p.364). Are uneducated people easier to control? Is this the reason for this education?

Knowing that this book was written by Theodore Roosevelt makes it an important book regardless of the actual text. TR's influence on the strategic importance of seapower can be traced back to his feelings as a young author. The book itself was tedious and not very inspiring. It's interesting to glimpse the feelings of the young, strong, post-Civil War American writing the book. As far as a history of the War of 1812, you can do much better elsewhere.

In a time when patriotism is passe, reading this book can redden the stuff in any American's veins. Our Navy's often-victorious battles against a superb and numerically superior foe ranks with the Athenian victory at Marathon in the annals of honor. Roosevelt was a natural storyteller and a first-rate scholar. Like JFK two generations later ("Why England Slept") this work was the product of a young twentysomething Harvard grad (JFK was actually a senior) that commanded serious attention nationally, and presaged a later rise to the summit of public life. Roosevelt's research is exhaustive, but not tedious, thanks to a vigorous prose style that carries the reader through a mass of detail without losing sail. The digression on which nationalities make the best seafarers would no doubt be considered un-PC today, but, as a general characterization of national characteristics, they arguably hold true. The author's final chapter, on the Battle of New Orleans, forshadows future policy, in that his criticism of the unreliability of the militia were embodied in the reforms that fully Federalized the National Guard, as the Dick Act of 1903. (Doubtless, his Spanish-American War experiences contributed to his desire to supplant the 1793 Militia Act, as well.) This book rests on my shelf, next to Mahan's "The Influence of Sea Power Upon History," and O'Brien's Aubrey-Maturin novels - as is fitting for an historical work written in the spirit of high adventure and studded with minute detail. -Lloyd A. Conway

This very well-written account, surprising from a youth of only 23, gives balanced portrayals of most of the major sea battles between the fledgling American navy, and the Lord of the Seas, Great Britain. In it, Roosevelt backs up his praise of American maritime ingenuity and the seaworthiness and discipline of its sailors with proofs, citations and cautious but sound reasoning. In each, diagrams of the engagements are provided, as well as other documented statistics, without overloading the reader with details, yet there are plenty of those. Roosevelt describes the handling of each ship and the actions of its captains with minute detail, without being, to the layman, purely technical. Although Roosevelt beats the patriotic drum, he also swings a corrective switch, against our commanders and our partisan historians, when their actions are faulty and objectionable -- a fact which underscores his fairmindedness and the authenticity of his rendering.

Have yet to find a really thoughtful, well organized book on the Unabomber. I read a fair number of true-crime books; generally I rate Robert Graysmith, who has written excellent books about the Zodiac killer and the Trailside Killer. Those books were well written, full of fascinating facts and research. But Graysmith's Unabomber book "A Desire to Kill" was obviously rushed into print, trying to beat the competition -- an effort to have a title before the public before the trial, while interest in the case was high.

Much the same can be said of Mad Genius. It was also published before the trial. It isn't quite as confusing as Graysmith's book, but then it doesn't strive to be more than a quick summary of what the investigation was like and who the victims were. To make up for lack of depth and/or detail, there is an extremely long list of the evidence seized at the Montana cabin -- with no explanation for what the coded notations the FBI used stand for. And then there's the complete manifesto, appended at the end. My favorite part was the photocopy of the Kazynski's hand-written note about seeds at the very end. At least it had a personal touch.

The definitive Unabomer book has yet to be written; it would take someone like Vincent Bugliosi or Ann Rule to do it justice -- or else the Robert Graysmith of old.

It's clear right from the start that Mad Genius was written in a hurry. The writing is uneven in places, there are stylistic rough edges, but this is no novel, and if Kaczynski would like a nicer biography he'll just have to write one himself. Still, the book is timely, and important, and sufficiently well written to make for easy reading.

The book helps answer many questions about the Unabomber:

- What are the facts of the case? [ not a trivial question for such a protracted case ]

- What is the Ted Kaczynski's background? Who is he, where did he come from, could anyone have guessed that this is what he was up to?

- Why he did it -- motives, frustrations, ideas.

And that's basically all that most people will ever want to know about the unabomber and his story. The book will also give you plenty of minutia to relish over, such as his the inventory of his cabin at the time of the arrest, what "technology" (or lack thereof) did he use to assemble his bombs, and it lists his manifesto in full. The book is not expensive and read quickly -- get it, read it, satisfy your morbid curiosity! :)

Has anybody ever seen a complete list of the contents of Ted's cabin? I need to know the books he had. I've heard he had hundreds of books. What were they? Can anyone tell me what books Ted was reading? Have you noticed how the press squashed that aspect of this man's life?

The Birds were wealthy and religious and intelligent. They were aware of the larger issues and they were appealing persons. There is sadness in the book's depiction of everyone's losses, including the slaves'. Works well as a much more readable companion piece to the massive book, The Children of Pride.

This is an exceptional starting point for the busy clinician. Organized by topic (e.g., "the patient with hallucinations"), this guide outlines what you need to know to be of practical service in an astonishingly wide range of clinical situations--pain management, sleep disorders, the "VIP" patient. Almost every chief complaint or clinical context has been considered.

Stern (as usual) has assembled contributors who excel not only in clinical medicine, but in teaching well. By using this wise and helpful guide, one learns not only how to help, but how to think clearly about complex presentations.

All that prevents this truly useful volume from receiving five stars is an improved table of contents--you will want to get to the heart of the matter quickly. (For bonus stars,the intrepid MGH crew will produce a companion volume, "Beyond Primary Care," for all the psychiatrists who will now have only extremely complex cases referred!)

This is a essays collection in a conference held in US. For a Chinese as me, it is good for me to know how the excellent western scholars to study in Chinese social and political history. However, I think it would be better if one or two papers, written by chinese scholars, were included.

The author well states legal points of debate regarding the "non-trial" of Dr.Kaczynski. Provides interesting insight to the legal system and inparticular Dr. Kaczynski's plight. However, the book could have been reduced to 2-3 chapters if such points/observations were concisely and clearly stated once.

A very encouraging change from the typical stuff that foams up around high profile cases like Kazcynski's. He keeps away from murky psychological speculations about why he did it and describes the legal system, its tradition and the often personal agendas of its actors with a complexity and sense of perspective that we'll never get on television. Unlike Mello, I don't think that the Unabomber will ever get his day in court. That is sort of shocking, for if violent dissenters like Kazcynski absolutely should be tracked down and punished, society needs to understand that their acts are expressive of something besides mere individual insanity. Neither the extorted publication of a manifesto nor the silence of a coerced guilty plea make any real assessment possible. A trial might have, and Mello is very effective in explaining both why it did not take place, and why basic constitutional and ethical principles were compromised in the process. Of course, he has his own axe to grind, but it is a sharp and sturdy one.

I was expecting a somewhat dry recountal of judicial process and courtroom manuevers when I began reading this title, and was completely surprised to find a book which raises a multitude of thought provoking issues. Mello presents Kaczynski's case clearly and intelligently, and provides a strong argument to support his belief that Kaczynski was unfairly manipulated by his attorneys and Judge Burrell. Yet along the way, Mello also tackles significant topics such as the definition of insanity, media misguiding, euthanasia vs. state assisted suicide vs. consensual execution, personal agenda/ethics in the legal field, diaries and the right to privacy, et cetera. Many of these issues are intelligently discussed within the context of very interesting historical cases. Mello's writing style came across to me as somewhat lacking in personality, at first, yet I soon realized that his straightforward voice is most effective in communicating the issues at hand. In choosing a no-nonsense style, the author does well to include numerous quotes and excerpts from disparate notables such as Anne Frank, Camus, Walt Whitman, Nietzsche, Bram Stoker, Rilke, Socrates, et cetera to pepper the reading with a chorus of voices. By concluding the book with victim descriptions from the Government's Sentencing Memorandum, Mello provides a complete and haunting plot twist....rather unsettling. This book offers not only an incredibly fair, edifying and intriguing view of the behind-the-scenes shenanigans of the judicial players, but also solicits the reader into contemplation of important issues. I highly reccommend this book not only to those interested in the specifics of Kaczynski's experience, but to anyone interested in reading an evolved, well thought and thought-provoking book.

I live in Lincoln, Montana and I found a number to statements in this book not true. They may be small statements, not very significant, but in a non-fiction book every statement should be lchecked for truth before being printed. We do not have a bus that goes from Lincoln to Helena. If just one statement is not true, then it makes you wonder what else in the book is not true.

Everyone seemed to know about the Unabomber. There wasn't a bigger surprise than when they found the maker of some 15 bombs was a Harvard graduate living in the woods in Montana. This book helps explain why Theodore Kaczynski had reasons for his mail bombs, why he picked his targets, and it will answer that important question, "How could a poverty-stricken man, riding a bike, living in a shack with no electricity or running water, spread fear from coast to coast, and elude the police for almost eightenn years?"

This was a great descriptive book about the UNABOMBER'S whole life- from his successes in college, being a genius and going on to become a proffesor at Harvard as well as other highly educated universities to the components that made up his killing machines.